Undisclosed Easement as Error Concerning Principal Quality of Land Sold

A party sought annulment of a contract alleging a mistake concerning the principal quality of the object of the contract, specifically that the object, a piece of land, was subject to an easement of passage, which was not disclosed during the sale. The trial court dismissed the claim, finding the easement was a known or easily discoverable encumbrance that did not constitute an essential quality of the property. The appellate court upheld this decision, reasoning that the existence of a right of way, even if unstated, does not automatically invalidate a contract for error on the principal quality of the thing sold unless it substantially alters the property's utility for the specific purpose for which the buyer intended it, which was not sufficiently demonstrated. The highest court quashed the decision, holding that an undisclosed, established servitude that burdens the property constitutes an error concerning the substance of the thing sold, as it affects the very quality the buyer was contracting for, thereby warranting the contract's annulment.